Letters To The Editor

FIREARMS

No conspiracy, just logical differences

William Turner (Letters, Dec. 7) criticizes an commentary by journalist Jill Labbe of the Fort-Worth Starr Telegram. He says it “plainly clarifies the gradual political drive to collectively disarm the law-abiding citizenry. It predicts the eventual political takeover and establishment of absolute authority (oligarchy) over these disarmed citizens.”

News flash: there is no conspiracy, no oligarchy at work here. What we have is democracy in action.

People who live in urban areas don’t like guns. In urban areas, the only folks who have guns are criminals, drug dealers, scared citizens and the police. Guns seem to be pointed only at people. They have severely degraded the quality of life in cities. The stories are sad: children killed in a crossfire, mothers held at gunpoint and mugged. It doesn’t really occur to city folk that people hunt; urban folks get their meat at Safeway.

So, it’s just a difference of opinion drawn from different experiences.

Turner’s way of life is diminished without guns. My way of life is diminished with guns. But the majority of people live in urban areas. Therefore, there’s a lot of national support for gun control laws. The government Turner finds so arbitrary is actually doing a pretty good job of representing the views of most citizens.

Everyone seems to support Democracy - until they’re in the minority camp. But in order for it to work, we have to respect the majority opinion of our fellow citizens, even when they seem dumb to us, even when we hate the president they elected, even when we hate the gun laws they pass. Stacy Swider-Schalick Veradale

WASHINGTON STATE

Whale hunting not justified

Re: “Sea Shepherd III weighs anchor, leaves Neah Bay” (Nov. 26).

I can appreciate an ethnic group’s desire to maintain certain traditions unique to its culture, but the Makah whale hunt troubles me. The rationale behind this appears to be one of cultural pride. But are we to believe that the Makah Indians waited for over 70 years with bated breath for the Gray Whale to come off the endangered species list?

When the hunts were suspended back in the 1920s, the tribe used the animals for oil or trade. It’s hard to believe they need these animals for their present-day survival. It is believable that the Makah do honor and worship the whale in their own religion and that these hunts serve some religious purpose. But I’m afraid this is just another way for an Indian tribe to make more money off the government that subjugated it so long ago.

Should the Makah build a casino like most of the other Washington tribes or resume whale hunts and sell the parts off to places like Japan? In Japan, the price for whale blubber and other whale parts has risen in the wake of the whaling ban. Seemingly overnight, Japan’s black market whaling operation has turned into a large and lucrative business. Can we be sure that this tribe won’t be selling off the whales piecemeal as they are harvested out of the Puget Sound and Pacific Ocean?

Letting these Indians resume their hunts is a step back toward commercial whaling and the atrocities that go with it. Paul W. Thornton Spokane

Makah should learn about whales

Regarding the Makah side of the whaling story.

Again, the focus is on rekindling their culture and sustaining their heritage. They state that the spiritual ceremony is a far cry from merely killing the whale. However, killing the whale is the issue here.

The strong opposition evoked by this has nothing to do with racism. It has everything to do with understanding the depth of research compiled on these whales since the early days of whaling. These animals communicate over thousands of miles. Their existence is threatened by pollution of the oceans. Gradually over the years, they’ve renewed their trust in humans and will now approach whale watch boats, allowing us to experience their majesty. Much has changed since whalers referred to them as “devil fish” due to the fight they gave while dying agonizing deaths by harpooning.

I pray that the Makahs can visit these magnificent whales in the St. Ignatius Lagoon in Baha without their guns. They would view them gently urging their newborn calves near the rafts so tourists could touch them. They have forgiven us for our inhumanity and are forging a bond and passing it on to their young.

Cultural activities are good, but not when harm is done. If you truly understand the intelligence level of these creatures, returning to whaling is unacceptable. Education is the key to understanding.

I believe there are better ways to sustain their heritage and still move into the 21st century learning from the past and growing together into the future. Barbara K. Alden Spokane

THE ENVIRONMENT

Just say no to activists

Re: “Unbearable conditions” (Nov. 29).

The bear-dam-salmon triangle is just a natural for the bug and bunny activists. The main problem with their planning is that it factors out people. There is no way these Earth-Just-Us activists can achieve their goal without eliminating about 80 percent of the people.

They have already succeeded in exporting a lot of our economy to other countries such as Chile, New Zealand, Brazil, etc., by getting the Clinton administration to close down a large part of our public lands. Now they want to eliminate irrigation, river transportation, flood control and turn the lights out by removing (breaching) our dams.

The claim is that this must be done to create grizzly bear habitat. The goal to bring grizzly bears in by the freight train load is long on emotion but short on facts and planning for the future housing, feeding, clothing and energizing of the people of the United States. Many of the enviros want to take us back 150 to 200 years ago. It’s very difficult to go back in time, and if they could manage to pull it off, we would find they were not the good old days, just the difficult old days.

The time has come for those of the silent majority to make themselves heard. Just say no to yet another attempt by the enviro-activists to turn our public lands into their private domain. Gary Garrison Northwest Timber Workers Resource Council, Kettle Falls, Wash.

No power advantage in keeping dams

Many letter writers have described the benefits of keeping the the lower Snake River dams. Most made the point that low-cost power the dams provide is a fair trade-off for any environmental degradation.

Keep one thing in mind. The strongest political supporters for keeping the dams are also ideologues of deregulation.

According to ex-governor Cecil Andrus, most power produced by the dams during summer months already goes to Los Angeles. If deregulation becomes what the Republicans keep saying they want it to be, most of the power will leave the area. Any cost advantage we now hold will rapidly disappear if we have to bid against large urban areas for our own power. We in the Northwest will end up paying the environmental cost so Californians can have cheaper electricity. We will exterminate our once great salmon runs just so power company executives can have massive end-of-year bonuses due to increased profits.

I don’t understand why we seem to be so intent on destroying everything that makes this part of the country so great.

New Jersey’s nickname, the Garden State, was not originally satirical. The people just made some bad decisions on the road to industrial development. Let us not do the same. Paul N. Valanoff Moscow, Idaho

Eliminate need for migration

Having read about the meeting on dam breaching, I’m sorry I wasn’t there to raise my voice with those who think this is a ridiculous idea. I’ve had trouble believing there are actually those who favor taking out the dams, but it sounds as though more than a few feel that way.

I hope reason will prevail and they’ll give up the idea and stop wasting money on studies. However, we’ve got to be vigilant or the unthinkable might happen.

The Corps of Engineers’ decision to study the feasibility of taking out the dams lends credibility to the idea in the minds of some. It shouldn’t. If someone were to put up the money, the Corps would be happy to study whether it’s better for one to put his pants on right leg first. The corps wants something to do. It was happy to build the dams would be happy to take them out. Too bad the money spent on studies wasn’t used for something useful.

Let’s put salmon hatcheries below the dams, plant freshwater fish above them and forget about making the fish swim up and down the river. Everybody would have fish to catch, and think of the money we would save. It seems so simple.

Of course, there is no scientific way to guarantee salmon will ever come back to the way they used to be, no matter what is done. Jack Ensley Colfax, Wash.

Create panel to oversee salmon

Jennifer Pierson’s Nov. 27 article on the salmon recovery project worries me. I am concerned abut how well the taxpayers’ money is being spent on saving salmon. The way this money has been spent obviously has not helped.

To make better use of taxpayers’ dollars, there should be a committee to make decisions about salmon preservation. Business, environmentalism and the government should be represented, and all the representatives should have to agree on any decision, not just a majority. This might help make the project less of a pork barrel.

It would be a shame to see salmon die because of underfunding or funding of bad ideas. Daniel A. Pauw, age 14 Spokane

Talk not enough to reverse warming

Recently, the United States completed another round of international global warming negotiations in Buenos Aires. By signing the Kyoto Protocol, the United States showed that it takes the threat of global warming seriously.

However, if we do not begin to take action to cut our emissions of greenhouse gases, this move will be nothing more than a symbolic gesture.

The U.S. is the world’s leading producer of greenhouse gases - emitting one quarter of the world’s greenhouse gas pollution, with only 4 percent of the population. Power plants and automobiles produce one-third of our emissions of carbon dioxide, the leading greenhouse gas.

Yet, thanks to intense lobbying by the electric utility industry and auto manufacturers, no regulations restrict carbon dioxide emissions from these sources.

Automobile and power plant pollution is responsible for many environmental and health problems we face in this country today including acid rain, lung disease, asthma, and smog, to name a few. By cutting global warming pollution from these sources, we simultaneously address many other environmental and health threats.

If we are going to curb global warming, the U.S. must take active steps to cut greenhouse gases polluting power plants and automobiles. Dave L. Robinson Curlew, Wash.

THE MEDIA

African American Voice is no good

Blame African Americans? It was not surprising to see the publisher of the African American Voice follow the pattern. This newspaper purported to speak for all African Americans, yet doesn’t understand what news consists of, locally, nationally or internationally. This paper reflected the views of the publisher, who thrives on protest.

Most of the African American Voice’s articles are taken from the Internet and are not supported by fact. Boasting a circulation of about 3,000 is misleading because many African Americans had never heard of this publication. It would probably be more accurate to say “printing about 3,000.”

As taxpayers in Spokane, we are affected by issues - streets, the Lincoln Street bridge, the incinerator, state audits of the city, city audits, salary hikes, utility rate increases, parking meter increases, etc. - not just police.

A new Spokane Regional Business Center was dedicated on Nov. 12. Where was this newspaper? A newspaper produced once a month is not enough in this age to sustain even the gratuitous advertising.

The December issue is a tragic display of inexperience in the news area. I support freedom of speech but to publish the malice of random rambling to depreciate what was accomplished by Carl Maxey - a longtime civil rights fighter - is irresponsible. The full contents of the December issue should hasten the Voice’s departure, even with the platitudes uttered by self-serving individuals. Edward Thomas, Jr. Spokane

Is remote-start gadget legal?

Recently, I was watching the 5 p.m. news on Channel 6. There was a news report on leaving your car running unattended being illegal.

Over the past several weeks, on various radio stations in the area, I have heard advertisements for “remote car starters” so you can wait inside while your car warms up during the cold months.

My question is, if this activity is not legal here, why are our radio stations and local auto accessory stores promoting it? Steven C. Blind Spokane

Keep Johnson and Jackson straight

The blabbermouth media have it all wrong again. We hear repeatedly about impeachment proceedings against Richard Nixon and Andrew Jackson as precedence to the current in Starr vs. Clinton.

It just gets repeated, and more than once I have heard it said that an impeached president now graces our twenty dollar bill.

Wrong! It wasn’t Andrew Jackson, the seventh president of the United States, but Andrew Johnson, the seventeenth president. Johnson was indeed impeached by the House but acquitted by the Senate, by a margin of one vote, in 1868. Richard Nixon, as many of us remember, resigned before the process ever moved to a Senate trial.

So, nobody has never been impeached, tried and convicted. I really doubt that President Clinton, after six years of peace and prosperity, deserved such a place in history. Gilbert J. Keithly Spokane

KREM 2 had right to omit segment

Some of the folks outraged by KREM 2’s editing out of the Kevorkian clip apparently don’t understand much about censorship, the First Amendment or news reporting.

Either choice, to air it or not, was a valid option.

Will Pitman (Letters, Dec. 1) wonders what right KREM 2 has to “play a little God” and “supercede the First Amendment.”

It’s their station - that’s where they get the right. The First Amendment says the government can’t make that choice for them. Pitman is the one who wants to “play a little God” and tell them what to air.

Rita Bierly (Letters, Dec. 1) is concerned about KREM 2 not meeting its obligation to provide unbiased news information. What obligation is that? Who obliged it? Bierly? God? It’s a privately owned station; it’s KREM’s choice. And, if anyone thinks unbiased news even exists, they are naive.

A station run by private business will have a different agenda than a public station, which will have a different take than a Christian station or a station run by the Communist Party, etc. In any case, people decide what to air and all people have their biases.

So, agree or not whether KREM 2 should have aired that segment, but please don’t rant that it was not the station’s right to choose. It was, which is what the First Amendment is about. Dwight J. Vance Spokane

PEOPLE IN SOCIETY

Gangs are racist organizations

Our society’s biggest racism problem is ethnic street gangs. It has been my experience, that black and Latino street gangs are essentially a racist phenomenon. Based on their sheer numbers and criminal activities, these ethnic street gangs are much more troubling than the Aryans. Yet, our society does not seem to recognize street gangs as racist. Why? It is important that these individuals be labeled for what they are: racists. Racism has no place in a democratic society and requires confrontation.

We need a deeper understanding of racism. Everyone must realize that all identifiable ethnic groups have individuals with racist tendencies. It is not a solely a European-American phenomenon. Denial or politically correct propaganda on the subject is just as hurtful as Nazi propaganda. Our schools should teach that ethnic street gangs are racist. S.S. Howze Sagle, Idaho